No, my point is there would be a chance of eg. someone leaking documents which were concrete evidence (similar to the docs Snowden leaked). No concrete evidence for a false flag attack has been found, only vague circumstantial connections.
In my opinion, no intelligent person (be that CIA/MOSSAD/Illuminati/reptilian etc etc.) would undergo an operation with such huge risk of repercussions, when there would be safer ways of achieving the same end result (excuse for Iraq invasion, defence contracts, claiming oil etc.). Why plan such an intricate plot involving passenger planes/missiles/fake flights/co-ordination between multiple gov departments? There would be easier ways to do it, doesn't add up IMO.
That is one of the best anti conspiracy arguments I've come across.
Some counter arguments.
1) If the act were perpetrated by people acting for ideological reasons than Snowden type leaks would not be a problem.
2) The evidence for a broader conspiracy is considerably more than 'vague circumstantial connections'.
3) Whether 'an easier way' existed would depend on what the goals were. If the goal were simply to harm the United States with minimal risk they could have spent a few million dollars generating counterfeit USD and dropping them around strategic places. It looks rather that the goal involved a significant psychological factor, and further that conspiracy theories may have been part of the goal.
----------
I'm not gonna vote, sorry
OP should add "I don't know" as an option.
added
---------
One strong piece of evidence that is often overlooked is that the debris field from the plane that went down in PA was inconsistent with the stories about how it crashed. However it is consistent with a missile shoot down. .
False. A missile shoot down would have spread major parts of the aircraft over a 5-10 mile range. Why would you say something like this?
You take a phony authoritative tone "why would you say something like this" instead of simply spending a few seconds on Google.
The debris field is not even close to what it would be if the official account were accurate.
It is exactly what it would be in the case of an air to air missile strike.
Flight 93 was almost certainly shot down.
1) Debris was scattered up to 8 miles from the main impact site.
2) There was an effort initiated from within the USG to promote the idea that there might have been a bomb on board, which would have explained the wide debris field.
From Wikipedia "The first responders arrived at the crash site after 10:06.[52] Cleveland Center controllers, unaware the flight had crashed, notified the Northeast Air Defense Sector (NEADS) at 10:07 that Flight 93 had a bomb on board and passed the last known position. This call was the first time the military was notified about the flight.[21] Ballinger sent one final ACARS message to Flight 93 at 10:10, "Don't divert to DC. Not an option." He repeated the message one minute later. The Herndon Command Center alerted FAA headquarters that Flight 93 had crashed at 10:13.[21] "
etc
----------
A group of transnational heroin traffickers affiliated with various governments.
Well that's a new one I've not heard before. I think the price rise of heroin was just a byproduct of war rather than a conspiracy by the dealers to be honest.
Actually the heroin conspiracy is the only conspiracy theory that is supported by all of the evidence and is not contradicted by any of the evidence. It looks like 911 was a raggedy makeshift plan by people in several governments who saw what the Taliban were doing and needed a quick stop.
It explains the Israeli involvement, the high level U.S. involvement, the lack of substantive challenge from Russia's intelligence services, in effect the Russian involvement, and many other odd pieces.